NON-COGNITIVISM AND THE PROBLEM OF MORAL-BASED EPISTEMIC REASONS: A SYMPATHETIC REPLY TO CIAN DORR
|
|
- Elvin Norton
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 DISCUSSION NOTE NON-COGNITIVISM AND THE PROBLEM OF MORAL-BASED EPISTEMIC REASONS: BY JOSEPH LONG JOURNAL OF ETHICS & SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY DISCUSSION NOTE OCTOBER 2016 URL: COPYRIGHT JOSEPH LONG 2016
2 Non-Cognitivism and the Problem of Moral-Based Epistemic Reasons: A Sympathetic Reply to Cian Dorr A ccording to Cian Dorr (2002), non-cognitivism has the implausible implication that arguments like the following are cases of wishful thinking: P1 If lying is wrong, then the souls of liars will be punished in the afterlife. P2 Lying is wrong. C The souls of liars will be punished in the afterlife. (Call this the Liar Argument. ) If non-cognitivism implies that the Liar Argument and similar arguments are cases of wishful thinking, then, Dorr further claims, non-cognitivism remains implausible even if one solves the socalled Frege-Geach problem. 1 Dorr s claims have faced a number of objections, but I believe that Dorr is onto something. 2 So, after summarizing Dorr s argument and briefly describing three flaws in what Dorr claims, I shall present a distinct objection to non-cognitivism and use the preceding to show what Dorr s argument gets right and what it gets wrong. Turning to Dorr s argument, Dorr s guiding question is this: Given that P1 and P2 imply C, can acceptance of P1 and P2 ever give someone reason to come to accept C? (2002: 97, emphasis in original). Intuitively, the answer is yes ; accepting P1 and P2 can give someone reason to accept C. Dorr argues that non-cognitivism implies that the answer is no, however, which is a reason to reject non-cognitivism. To show that non-cognitivism implies that accepting P1 and P2 never gives one reason to accept C, Dorr begins with a story about Edgar, who initially accepts P1 on the basis of others presumed authority on such matters. Edgar has insufficient evidence for either 1 The Frege-Geach problem is to account for the meanings and logical properties of evaluative claims in a way that is consistent with non-cognitivist semantics. If non-cognitivists cannot solve the Frege-Geach problem, then it is not clear how they can account for the validity of arguments, like the Liar Argument, that involve embedded atomic moral claims; however, if non-cognitivists can solve the problem, then presumably they can account for the validity of such arguments. For an excellent discussion of the Frege-Geach problem, see Schroeder (2008). 2 For objections to Dorr s claim that non-cognitivism renders the Liar Argument a case of wishful thinking, see Enoch (2003) and Lenman (2003). For responses to both Enoch and Lenman, see Schroeder (2011). See Budolfson (2011) and Mabrito (2013) for objections to Dorr s claim that solving the Frege-Geach problem will not suffice to solve the wishful thinking problem. Whether or not Budolfson s and Mabrito s objections to Dorr s claim are correct, this essay makes it clear that solving the Frege-Geach problem will not suffice to solve the distinct problem that I raise. 1
3 P2 or C, however, so he accepts neither P2 nor C. But, after reflecting for a time on the moral nature of lying, Edgar comes to accept P2. Finally, Edgar comes to accept C on the basis of inferring it from P1 and P2. We can now summarize Dorr s argument like this: (1) Initially, it was irrational for Edgar to accept C before he accepted P2. (2) If non-cognitivism is true, then Edgar s coming to accept P2 was only a change in non-cognitive attitude. (3) If it was irrational for Edgar to accept C before he accepted P2, and Edgar s coming to accept P2 was only a change in non-cognitive attitude, then it was irrational for Edgar to accept C after he accepted P2. (4) So, non-cognitivism implies that it was irrational for Edgar to accept C after he accepted P2 [from (1), (2) and (3)]. (5) But it was not irrational for Edgar to accept C after he accepted P2. (6) Non-cognitivism is false [from (4) and (5)]. The argument is valid; so, let us consider each of its premises. As for (1), it is just part of the story: in the beginning, Edgar has insufficient evidence for either P2 or C. Turning to (2), Dorr states: According to the non-cognitivist, all that happened when [Edgar] came to accept P2 was a change in his non-cognitive attitudes. He acquired no new evidence or other beliefs relevant to the fate of liars in the afterlife. Nor did he intuit the truth of C a priori, or take himself to have done so (2002: 99). So, since no additional evidence for C accompanied Edgar s coming to accept P2, and non-cognitivism implies that P2 expresses a non-cognitive attitude, non-cognitivism implies that Edgar s coming to accept P2 was just a change in non-cognitive attitude. 3 Thus, (2). As for (3), Dorr states: Only a change in one s cognitive states, or in one s evidence, can make the difference between a case in which it would be irrational to believe something and one in which it would be rational to do so. It is often rational to modify your views about one part of the world so that they cohere with your views about the rest of the world. It is irrational to modify your views about the world so that they cohere with your desires and feelings. That s wishful thinking! (2002: 99). In other words, to change one s view of the world based on only a change in one s non-cognitive attitudes amounts to wishful thinking, which is fallacious. Consequently, if Edgar s coming to accept P2 is just a matter of Edgar s changing his non-cognitive attitudes, then since it was irrational for Edgar to accept C prior to accepting P2, Edgar s accepting C after accepting P2 3 To be a bit more precise, Edgar s going from not accepting P2 to accepting P2 might have been accompanied by some other changes in cognitive attitude for example, Edgar came to believe that he now accepts that lying is wrong. But such changes are irrelevant to whether Edgar can rationally accept C given his going from not accepting P2 to accepting P2. So, we can set these changes aside.
4 is also irrational. Thus, (3). Together (1), (2) and (3) entail (4): if noncognitivism is true, then it was irrational for Edgar to accept C after he accepted P2. As (5) claims, however, it is intuitively not irrational for Edgar to accept C after accepting P2. Therefore, per (6), non-cognitivism is false. Having summarized Dorr s argument, I will briefly describe three flaws in what Dorr claims. Throughout, let us assume that the Frege-Geach problem has been solved and, therefore, that the Liar Argument is valid whether or not non-cognitivism is true. 4 The first flaw involves Dorr s guiding question, which is about whether accepting P1 and P2 is ever a reason to accept C. According to Dorr, non-cognitivism implies that the answer is no because non-cognitivism renders the Liar Argument a case of wishful thinking. But, even for paradigm cases of wishful thinking, accepting all of the offending argument s premises is often a reason to accept its conclusion, since paradigm cases of wishful thinking are often valid. Take, for example, the following argument: (1) If I hope that my proposal will be accepted, then my proposal will be accepted. (2) I hope that my proposal will be accepted. (3) My proposal will be accepted. (Call this the Hope Argument. ) The Hope Argument is a paradigm case of wishful thinking since it offers my hoping that my proposal will be accepted as a reason to believe that my proposal will be accepted. But, even though the argument is a case of wishful thinking, it would still be irrational to accept (7) and (8) but not (9). For accepting (7) amounts to accepting that either (7) s antecedent is false or (7) s consequent is true, and accepting (8) amounts to accepting that (7) s antecedent is not false. But, given any sentences P and Q, it would be irrational to accept ~P Q and ~~P while not accepting Q. So, even though the Hope Argument is a case of wishful thinking, it would still be irrational to accept its premises while not accepting its conclusion. Similarly, then, contrary to what Dorr claims, even if non-cognitivism renders the Liar Argument a case of wishful thinking, it does not follow that non-cognitivism allows one to rationally accept P1 and P2 but not C. 5 Turning to the second flaw, Dorr claims that if the Liar Argument is a case of wishful thinking, then Edgar s reasoning would be defective when Edgar infers C from P1 and P2. But if the Liar Argument is a case of wishful thinking, then Edgar s reasoning becomes defective at the beginning of the story when Edgar accepts P1 without sufficient reason to either reject P1 s antecedent or accept P1 s consequent. For accepting a conditional without either rejecting its antecedent or accepting its consequent amounts to accept- 4 Cf. n. 2, above. 5 Of course, there might be overriding reasons to reject C, in which case, assuming that the argument is valid, one should reject one of the premises. But it would still be irrational to accept P1 and P2 while not accepting C.
5 ing that, if one has sufficient reason to accept the antecedent, then one has sufficient reason to accept the consequent. So, when Edgar accepts P1 without sufficient reason to reject its antecedent or accept its consequent, Edgar ipso facto accepts that, if one has sufficient reason to accept P1 s antecedent, then one has sufficient reason to accept P1 s consequent. But if the Liar Argument is a case of wishful thinking, then the fact that one has sufficient reason to accept P1 s antecedent is irrelevant to whether one should accept P1 s consequent. The Hope Argument is similar: that one has sufficient reason to accept (7) s antecedent is irrelevant to whether one should accept (7) s consequent and to think otherwise would be irrational. So, if the Liar Argument is a case of wishful thinking, then it was irrational for Edgar to accept P1 in the first place. This is important, for it shows that if non-cognitivism implies that the Liar Argument is a case of wishful thinking, then even if non-cognitivism does not render the Liar Argument invalid, non-cognitivism still renders Edgar s reasoning fallacious. The third flaw in what Dorr claims is that, contrary to Dorr, noncognitivism does not imply that the Liar Argument is a case of wishful thinking. Wishful thinking is a kind of red-herring fallacy, and an argument commits a red-herring fallacy just in case it gives as a reason to accept a claim something that is irrelevant to whether one should accept the claim. The Hope Argument is a case in point: it gives my hoping that my proposal will be accepted as a reason to believe that my proposal will be accepted even though my hoping is irrelevant to whether one should believe that my proposal will be accepted. If non-cognitivism is true, however, then the Liar Argument does not give anything at all as a reason to believe that the souls of liars will be punished in the afterlife. To see this, consider the following question: (Hq) Why should I believe that my proposal will be accepted? Answering (Hq) requires giving a reason for belief. The answer that the Hope Argument gives is this: (Ha) I hope that my proposal will be accepted. Of course this is not a good reason, but it is still a reason. Suppose, though, that one were to respond to (Hq) with, say, a question, or a command, or some expression of approval indeed, anything other than a term that expresses a cognitive attitude. The response would be incoherent; it would be something like, One should believe that my proposal will be accepted because, yes, my proposal! That is incoherent. But if non-cognitivism is true, then the Liar Argument gives precisely that sort of answer to the question: (Lq) Why should one believe that the souls of liars will be punished in the afterlife?
6 The Liar Argument s answer to (Lq) is of course this: (La) Lying is wrong. But if non-cognitivism is true, then (La) expresses a non-cognitive attitude toward lying, and responding to (Lq) with the expression of a non-cognitive attitude would be incoherent. It would be like saying, One should believe that the souls of liars will be punished in the afterlife because boo: lying. That is incoherent. So, if non-cognitivism is true, then, contrary to what Dorr claims, the Liar Argument does not commit the wishful-thinking fallacy but that is because if non-cognitivism is true, then the Liar Argument does not offer a reason at all for belief. We now have the ingredients for a new objection to non-cognitivism, and, furthermore, we can see what Dorr s argument gets right and what it gets wrong. Here is the objection: (1) If non-cognitivism is true, then atomic moral claims do not give epistemic reasons. (2) Atomic moral claims do give epistemic reasons. (3) Non-cognitivism is false. (By epistemic reasons I mean reasons to believe a claim.) The argument is valid, and we have already seen why (10) is true: if non-cognitivism is true, then atomic moral claims express non-cognitive attitudes; but utterances in general that express non-cognitive attitudes cannot give reasons for belief. So, given non-cognitivism, atomic moral claims cannot give epistemic reasons. Hence, (10). That (11) is true is evinced by the fact that (La) is at least a coherent response to (Lq): if asked why one should believe that the souls of liars will be punished in the afterlife, it is at least coherent to respond with lying is wrong. Thus, (11). Given (10) and (11), we can conclude, per (12), that non-cognitivism is false. As for what Dorr s argument gets right, it points out quite correctly that, even if non-cognitivists solve the Frege-Geach problem, non-cognitivism still has a problem with atomic moral premises. But, whereas Dorr claims that non-cognitivism wrongly implies that atomic moral premises can give only bad epistemic reasons, we now see that that is not quite right. Rather, non-cognitivism implies that atomic moral premises cannot give epistemic reasons at all, which is a reason to reject noncognitivism. The College at Brockport, State University of New York Department of Philosophy jlong@brockport.edu
7 References Budolfson, M. (2011) Non-cognitivism and Rational Inference, Philosophical Studies 153: Dorr, C. (2002) Non-cognitivism and Wishful Thinking, Noûs 36: Enoch, D. (2003) How Noncognitivists Can Avoid Wishful Thinking, Southern Journal of Philosophy 41: Lenman, J. (2003) Noncognitivism and Wishfulness, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 6: Mabrito, R. (2013) Are Expressivists Guilty of Wishful Thinking? Philosophical Studies 165: Schroeder, M. (2011) How Not to Avoid Wishful Thinking, in M. Brady, ed., New Waves in Metaethics, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp (2008) Being For: Evaluating the Semantic Program of Expressivism, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Norm-Expressivism and the Frege-Geach Problem
Norm-Expressivism and the Frege-Geach Problem I. INTRODUCTION Megan Blomfield M oral non-cognitivism 1 is the metaethical view that denies that moral statements are truth-apt. According to this position,
More informationfinagling frege Mark Schroeder University of Southern California September 25, 2007
Mark Schroeder University of Southern California September 25, 2007 finagling frege In his recent paper, Ecumenical Expressivism: Finessing Frege, Michael Ridge claims to show how to solve the famous Frege-Geach
More informationNoncognitivism in Ethics, by Mark Schroeder. London: Routledge, 251 pp.
Noncognitivism in Ethics, by Mark Schroeder. London: Routledge, 251 pp. Noncognitivism in Ethics is Mark Schroeder s third book in four years. That is very impressive. What is even more impressive is that
More informationTHE FREGE-GEACH PROBLEM AND KALDERON S MORAL FICTIONALISM. Matti Eklund Cornell University
THE FREGE-GEACH PROBLEM AND KALDERON S MORAL FICTIONALISM Matti Eklund Cornell University [me72@cornell.edu] Penultimate draft. Final version forthcoming in Philosophical Quarterly I. INTRODUCTION In his
More informationAGAINST THE BEING FOR ACCOUNT OF NORMATIVE CERTITUDE
AGAINST THE BEING FOR ACCOUNT OF NORMATIVE CERTITUDE BY KRISTER BYKVIST AND JONAS OLSON JOURNAL OF ETHICS & SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY VOL. 6, NO. 2 JULY 2012 URL: WWW.JESP.ORG COPYRIGHT KRISTER BYKVIST AND JONAS
More informationPHILOSOPHY OF LANGUAGE AND META-ETHICS
The Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 54, No. 217 October 2004 ISSN 0031 8094 PHILOSOPHY OF LANGUAGE AND META-ETHICS BY IRA M. SCHNALL Meta-ethical discussions commonly distinguish subjectivism from emotivism,
More informationIntroduction to Cognitivism; Motivational Externalism; Naturalist Cognitivism
Introduction to Cognitivism; Motivational Externalism; Naturalist Cognitivism Felix Pinkert 103 Ethics: Metaethics, University of Oxford, Hilary Term 2015 Cognitivism, Non-cognitivism, and the Humean Argument
More informationTWO VERSIONS OF HUME S LAW
DISCUSSION NOTE BY CAMPBELL BROWN JOURNAL OF ETHICS & SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY DISCUSSION NOTE MAY 2015 URL: WWW.JESP.ORG COPYRIGHT CAMPBELL BROWN 2015 Two Versions of Hume s Law MORAL CONCLUSIONS CANNOT VALIDLY
More informationHAVE WE REASON TO DO AS RATIONALITY REQUIRES? A COMMENT ON RAZ
HAVE WE REASON TO DO AS RATIONALITY REQUIRES? A COMMENT ON RAZ BY JOHN BROOME JOURNAL OF ETHICS & SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY SYMPOSIUM I DECEMBER 2005 URL: WWW.JESP.ORG COPYRIGHT JOHN BROOME 2005 HAVE WE REASON
More informationSCHROEDER ON THE WRONG KIND OF
SCHROEDER ON THE WRONG KIND OF REASONS PROBLEM FOR ATTITUDES BY NATHANIEL SHARADIN JOURNAL OF ETHICS & SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY VOL. 7, NO. 3 AUGUST 2013 URL: WWW.JESP.ORG COPYRIGHT NATHANIEL SHARADIN 2013 Schroeder
More informationEXTERNALISM AND THE CONTENT OF MORAL MOTIVATION
EXTERNALISM AND THE CONTENT OF MORAL MOTIVATION Caj Strandberg Department of Philosophy, Lund University and Gothenburg University Caj.Strandberg@fil.lu.se ABSTRACT: Michael Smith raises in his fetishist
More informationhow expressivists can and should solve their problem with negation Noûs 42(4): Selected for inclusion in the 2008 Philosopher s Annual
Mark Schroeder University of Southern California August 18, 2006 how expressivists can and should solve their problem with negation Noûs 42(4): 573-599 Selected for inclusion in the 2008 Philosopher s
More informationCognitivism about imperatives
Cognitivism about imperatives JOSH PARSONS 1 Introduction Sentences in the imperative mood imperatives, for short are traditionally supposed to not be truth-apt. They are not in the business of describing
More informationEthical non-naturalism
Michael Lacewing Ethical non-naturalism Ethical non-naturalism is usually understood as a form of cognitivist moral realism. So we first need to understand what cognitivism and moral realism is before
More informationTHE UNBELIEVABLE TRUTH ABOUT MORALITY
THE UNBELIEVABLE TRUTH ABOUT MORALITY Bart Streumer b.streumer@rug.nl 9 August 2016 Forthcoming in Lenny Clapp (ed.), Philosophy for Us. San Diego: Cognella. Have you ever suspected that even though we
More informationPROSPECTS FOR A JAMESIAN EXPRESSIVISM 1 JEFF KASSER
PROSPECTS FOR A JAMESIAN EXPRESSIVISM 1 JEFF KASSER In order to take advantage of Michael Slater s presence as commentator, I want to display, as efficiently as I am able, some major similarities and differences
More informationDavid Copp, ed., The Oxford Handbook of Ethical Theory, Oxford: Oxford University
David Copp, ed., The Oxford Handbook of Ethical Theory, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006, pp. 665. 0-19-514779-0. $74.00 (Hb). The Oxford Handbook of Ethical Theory contains twenty-two chapters written
More informationDO NORMATIVE JUDGEMENTS AIM TO REPRESENT THE WORLD?
DO NORMATIVE JUDGEMENTS AIM TO REPRESENT THE WORLD? Bart Streumer b.streumer@rug.nl Ratio 26 (2013): 450-470 Also in Bart Streumer (ed.), Irrealism in Ethics Published version available here: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/rati.12035
More informationFatalism and Truth at a Time Chad Marxen
Stance Volume 6 2013 29 Fatalism and Truth at a Time Chad Marxen Abstract: In this paper, I will examine an argument for fatalism. I will offer a formalized version of the argument and analyze one of the
More informationPhilosophy in Review XXXI (2011), no. 5
Richard Joyce and Simon Kirchin, eds. A World without Values: Essays on John Mackie s Moral Error Theory. Dordrecht: Springer 2010. 262 pages US$139.00 (cloth ISBN 978-90-481-3338-3) In 1977, John Leslie
More informationSTILL NO REDUNDANT PROPERTIES: REPLY TO WIELENBERG
DISCUSSION NOTE STILL NO REDUNDANT PROPERTIES: REPLY TO WIELENBERG BY CAMPBELL BROWN JOURNAL OF ETHICS & SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY DISCUSSION NOTE NOVEMBER 2012 URL: WWW.JESP.ORG COPYRIGHT CAMPBELL BROWN 2012
More informationAttraction, Description, and the Desire-Satisfaction Theory of Welfare
Attraction, Description, and the Desire-Satisfaction Theory of Welfare The desire-satisfaction theory of welfare says that what is basically good for a subject what benefits him in the most fundamental,
More informationHybridizing moral expressivism and moral error theory
Fairfield University DigitalCommons@Fairfield Philosophy Faculty Publications Philosophy Department 1-1-2011 Hybridizing moral expressivism and moral error theory Toby Svoboda Fairfield University, tsvoboda@fairfield.edu
More informationA solution to the problem of hijacked experience
A solution to the problem of hijacked experience Jill is not sure what Jack s current mood is, but she fears that he is angry with her. Then Jack steps into the room. Jill gets a good look at his face.
More informationNaturalist Cognitivism: The Open Question Argument; Subjectivism
Naturalist Cognitivism: The Open Question Argument; Subjectivism Felix Pinkert 103 Ethics: Metaethics, University of Oxford, Hilary Term 2015 Introducing Naturalist Realist Cognitivism (a.k.a. Naturalism)
More informationPhilosophy 1100: Introduction to Ethics. Critical Thinking Lecture 1. Background Material for the Exercise on Validity
Philosophy 1100: Introduction to Ethics Critical Thinking Lecture 1 Background Material for the Exercise on Validity Reasons, Arguments, and the Concept of Validity 1. The Concept of Validity Consider
More informationHuemer s Clarkeanism
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research Philosophy and Phenomenological Research Vol. LXXVIII No. 1, January 2009 Ó 2009 International Phenomenological Society Huemer s Clarkeanism mark schroeder University
More informationARE ALL NORMATIVE JUDGMENTS DESIRE-LIKE? Alex Gregory
Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy Vol. 12, No. 1 September 2017 https://doi.org/10.26556/jesp.v12i1.212 2017 Author ARE ALL NORMATIVE JUDGMENTS DESIRE-LIKE? Alex Gregory I f I come to think that
More informationHåkan Salwén. Hume s Law: An Essay on Moral Reasoning Lorraine Besser-Jones Volume 31, Number 1, (2005) 177-180. Your use of the HUME STUDIES archive indicates your acceptance of HUME STUDIES Terms and
More informationReply to Robert Koons
632 Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic Volume 35, Number 4, Fall 1994 Reply to Robert Koons ANIL GUPTA and NUEL BELNAP We are grateful to Professor Robert Koons for his excellent, and generous, review
More informationtempered expressivism for Oxford Studies in Metaethics, volume 8
Mark Schroeder University of Southern California December 1, 2011 tempered expressivism for Oxford Studies in Metaethics, volume 8 This paper has two main goals. Its overarching goal, like that of some
More informationCoordination Problems
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research Philosophy and Phenomenological Research Vol. LXXXI No. 2, September 2010 Ó 2010 Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, LLC Coordination Problems scott soames
More informationEmotivism and its critics
Emotivism and its critics PHIL 83104 September 19, 2011 1. The project of analyzing ethical terms... 1 2. Interest theories of goodness... 2 3. Stevenson s emotivist analysis of good... 2 3.1. Dynamic
More informationPhilosophy 3100: Ethical Theory
Philosophy 3100: Ethical Theory Topic 2 - Non-Cognitivism: I. What is Non-Cognitivism? II. The Motivational Judgment Internalist Argument for Non-Cognitivism III. Why Ayer Is A Non-Cognitivist a. The Analytic/Synthetic
More informationDEFEASIBLE A PRIORI JUSTIFICATION: A REPLY TO THUROW
The Philosophical Quarterly Vol. 58, No. 231 April 2008 ISSN 0031 8094 doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9213.2007.512.x DEFEASIBLE A PRIORI JUSTIFICATION: A REPLY TO THUROW BY ALBERT CASULLO Joshua Thurow offers a
More informationIs it right to worry about the Frege-Geach problem?
Winner of the 2016 Boethius Prize Is it right to worry about the Frege-Geach problem? Miles Fender The Frege-Geach problem has been a significant point of contention in metaethical discourse for the past
More informationMoral Argumentation from a Rhetorical Point of View
Chapter 98 Moral Argumentation from a Rhetorical Point of View Lars Leeten Universität Hildesheim Practical thinking is a tricky business. Its aim will never be fulfilled unless influence on practical
More informationTHE MEANING OF OUGHT. Ralph Wedgwood. What does the word ought mean? Strictly speaking, this is an empirical question, about the
THE MEANING OF OUGHT Ralph Wedgwood What does the word ought mean? Strictly speaking, this is an empirical question, about the meaning of a word in English. Such empirical semantic questions should ideally
More informationBuck-Passers Negative Thesis
Mark Schroeder November 27, 2006 University of Southern California Buck-Passers Negative Thesis [B]eing valuable is not a property that provides us with reasons. Rather, to call something valuable is to
More informationContents. Detailed Chapter Contents Preface to the First Edition (2003) Preface to the Second Edition (2013) xiii
Alexander Miller Contemporary metaethics An introduction Contents Preface to the First Edition (2003) Preface to the Second Edition (2013) 1 Introduction 2 Moore's Attack on Ethical Naturalism 3 Emotivism
More informationthe negative reason existential fallacy
Mark Schroeder University of Southern California May 21, 2007 the negative reason existential fallacy 1 There is a very common form of argument in moral philosophy nowadays, and it goes like this: P1 It
More informationSituations in Which Disjunctive Syllogism Can Lead from True Premises to a False Conclusion
398 Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic Volume 38, Number 3, Summer 1997 Situations in Which Disjunctive Syllogism Can Lead from True Premises to a False Conclusion S. V. BHAVE Abstract Disjunctive Syllogism,
More informationMoral Twin Earth: The Intuitive Argument. Terence Horgan and Mark Timmons have recently published a series of articles where they
Moral Twin Earth: The Intuitive Argument Terence Horgan and Mark Timmons have recently published a series of articles where they attack the new moral realism as developed by Richard Boyd. 1 The new moral
More information1 expressivism, what. Mark Schroeder University of Southern California August 2, 2010
Mark Schroeder University of Southern California August 2, 2010 hard cases for combining expressivism and deflationist truth: conditionals and epistemic modals forthcoming in a volume on deflationism and
More informationGoldman on Knowledge as True Belief. Alvin Goldman (2002a, 183) distinguishes the following four putative uses or senses of
Goldman on Knowledge as True Belief Alvin Goldman (2002a, 183) distinguishes the following four putative uses or senses of knowledge : (1) Knowledge = belief (2) Knowledge = institutionalized belief (3)
More informationAnnotated List of Ethical Theories
Annotated List of Ethical Theories The following list is selective, including only what I view as the major theories. Entries in bold face have been especially influential. Recommendations for additions
More informationMoral Relativism and Conceptual Analysis. David J. Chalmers
Moral Relativism and Conceptual Analysis David J. Chalmers An Inconsistent Triad (1) All truths are a priori entailed by fundamental truths (2) No moral truths are a priori entailed by fundamental truths
More informationResemblance Nominalism and counterparts
ANAL63-3 4/15/2003 2:40 PM Page 221 Resemblance Nominalism and counterparts Alexander Bird 1. Introduction In his (2002) Gonzalo Rodriguez-Pereyra provides a powerful articulation of the claim that Resemblance
More informationNon-Cognitivism, Higher-Order Attitudes, and Stevenson s Do so as well!
Non-Cognitivism, Higher-Order Attitudes, and Stevenson s Do so as well! Meta-ethical non-cognitivism makes two claims - a negative one and a positive one. The negative claim is that moral utterances do
More informationBelieving Epistemic Contradictions
Believing Epistemic Contradictions Bob Beddor & Simon Goldstein Bridges 2 2015 Outline 1 The Puzzle 2 Defending Our Principles 3 Troubles for the Classical Semantics 4 Troubles for Non-Classical Semantics
More informationCompositional Semantics for Expressivists
Published in The Philosophical Quarterly 63 (253), pp. 633-659, doi: 10.1111/1467-9213.12073 Compositional Semantics for Expressivists By Arvid Båve, the Department of Philosophy, Linguistics and Theory
More informationR. M. Hare (1919 ) SINNOTT- ARMSTRONG. Definition of moral judgments. Prescriptivism
25 R. M. Hare (1919 ) WALTER SINNOTT- ARMSTRONG Richard Mervyn Hare has written on a wide variety of topics, from Plato to the philosophy of language, religion, and education, as well as on applied ethics,
More informationMillian responses to Frege s puzzle
Millian responses to Frege s puzzle phil 93914 Jeff Speaks February 28, 2008 1 Two kinds of Millian................................. 1 2 Conciliatory Millianism............................... 2 2.1 Hidden
More informationNondescriptivist Cognitivism: Framework for a New Metaethic
In Philosophical Papers 29 (2000), 121-53 Nondescriptivist Cognitivism: Framework for a New Metaethic Terry Horgan and Mark Timmons We propose to break some new ground in metaethics by sketching a view
More informationRight-Making, Reference, and Reduction
Right-Making, Reference, and Reduction Kent State University BIBLID [0873-626X (2014) 39; pp. 139-145] Abstract The causal theory of reference (CTR) provides a well-articulated and widely-accepted account
More informationDISCUSSION PRACTICAL POLITICS AND PHILOSOPHICAL INQUIRY: A NOTE
Practical Politics and Philosophical Inquiry: A Note Author(s): Dale Hall and Tariq Modood Reviewed work(s): Source: The Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 29, No. 117 (Oct., 1979), pp. 340-344 Published by:
More informationTEMPORAL NECESSITY AND LOGICAL FATALISM. by Joseph Diekemper
TEMPORAL NECESSITY AND LOGICAL FATALISM by Joseph Diekemper ABSTRACT I begin by briefly mentioning two different logical fatalistic argument types: one from temporal necessity, and one from antecedent
More informationBart Streumer, Unbelievable Errors, Oxford: Oxford University Press, ISBN
Bart Streumer, Unbelievable Errors, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017. ISBN 9780198785897. Pp. 223. 45.00 Hbk. In The Philosophy of Logical Atomism, Bertrand Russell wrote that the point of philosophy
More informationA problem for expressivism
ANALYSIS 58.4 OCTOBER 1998 A problem for expressivism Frank Jackson & Philip Pettit 1. Introduction Language, Truth and Logic added expressivism to the inventory of substantive positions in meta-ethics,
More informationINTUITION AND CONSCIOUS REASONING
The Philosophical Quarterly Vol. 63, No. 253 October 2013 ISSN 0031-8094 doi: 10.1111/1467-9213.12071 INTUITION AND CONSCIOUS REASONING BY OLE KOKSVIK This paper argues that, contrary to common opinion,
More informationAN ACTUAL-SEQUENCE THEORY OF PROMOTION
BY D. JUSTIN COATES JOURNAL OF ETHICS & SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY DISCUSSION NOTE JANUARY 2014 URL: WWW.JESP.ORG COPYRIGHT D. JUSTIN COATES 2014 An Actual-Sequence Theory of Promotion ACCORDING TO HUMEAN THEORIES,
More informationChoosing Rationally and Choosing Correctly *
Choosing Rationally and Choosing Correctly * Ralph Wedgwood 1 Two views of practical reason Suppose that you are faced with several different options (that is, several ways in which you might act in a
More informationDISCUSSION THE GUISE OF A REASON
NADEEM J.Z. HUSSAIN DISCUSSION THE GUISE OF A REASON The articles collected in David Velleman s The Possibility of Practical Reason are a snapshot or rather a film-strip of part of a philosophical endeavour
More informationAction in Special Contexts
Part III Action in Special Contexts c36.indd 283 c36.indd 284 36 Rationality john broome Rationality as a Property and Rationality as a Source of Requirements The word rationality often refers to a property
More informationMiller, Alexander, An Introduction to Contemporary Metaethics, Oxford: Polity Press, 2003, pp.
Miller, Alexander, An Introduction to Contemporary Metaethics, Oxford: Polity Press, 2003, pp. xii + 316, $64.95 (cloth), 29.95 (paper). My initial hope when I first saw Miller s book was that here at
More informationwhat makes reasons sufficient?
Mark Schroeder University of Southern California August 2, 2010 what makes reasons sufficient? This paper addresses the question: what makes reasons sufficient? and offers the answer, being at least as
More informationThe Limits of Normative Detachment 1 Nishi Shah Amherst College Draft of 04/15/10
The Limits of Normative Detachment 1 Nishi Shah Amherst College Draft of 04/15/10 Consider another picture of what it would be for a demand to be objectively valid. It is Kant s own picture. According
More informationMerricks on the existence of human organisms
Merricks on the existence of human organisms Cian Dorr August 24, 2002 Merricks s Overdetermination Argument against the existence of baseballs depends essentially on the following premise: BB Whenever
More informationON LEAVING ROOM FOR DOUBT: USING FREGE-GEACH TO ILLUMINATE EXPRESSIVISM S PROBLEM WITH OBJECTIVITY
Faraci 1 ON LEAVING ROOM FOR DOUBT: USING FREGE-GEACH TO ILLUMINATE EXPRESSIVISM S PROBLEM WITH OBJECTIVITY David Faraci [The Frege-Geach] problem itself, while possibly a devastating objection to expressivism,
More informationRobert Audi, The Architecture of Reason: The Structure and. Substance of Rationality. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Pp. xvi, 286.
Robert Audi, The Architecture of Reason: The Structure and Substance of Rationality. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001. Pp. xvi, 286. Reviewed by Gilbert Harman Princeton University August 19, 2002
More informationFaults and Mathematical Disagreement
45 Faults and Mathematical Disagreement María Ponte ILCLI. University of the Basque Country mariaponteazca@gmail.com Abstract: My aim in this paper is to analyse the notion of mathematical disagreements
More informationEpistemic Contextualism as a Theory of Primary Speaker Meaning
Epistemic Contextualism as a Theory of Primary Speaker Meaning Gilbert Harman, Princeton University June 30, 2006 Jason Stanley s Knowledge and Practical Interests is a brilliant book, combining insights
More informationxiv Truth Without Objectivity
Introduction There is a certain approach to theorizing about language that is called truthconditional semantics. The underlying idea of truth-conditional semantics is often summarized as the idea that
More informationPhilosophical Perspectives, 14, Action and Freedom, 2000 TRANSFER PRINCIPLES AND MORAL RESPONSIBILITY. Eleonore Stump Saint Louis University
Philosophical Perspectives, 14, Action and Freedom, 2000 TRANSFER PRINCIPLES AND MORAL RESPONSIBILITY Eleonore Stump Saint Louis University John Martin Fischer University of California, Riverside It is
More informationTHE CAMBRIDGE SOLUTION TO THE TIME OF A KILLING LAWRENCE B. LOMBARD
THE CAMBRIDGE SOLUTION TO THE TIME OF A KILLING LAWRENCE B. LOMBARD I. Introduction Just when we thought it safe to ignore the problem of the time of a killing, either because we thought the problem already
More informationHERMENEUTIC MORAL FICTIONALISM AS AN ANTI-REALIST STRATEGY (Please cite the final version in Philosophical Books 49, January 2008)
1 HERMENEUTIC MORAL FICTIONALISM AS AN ANTI-REALIST STRATEGY (Please cite the final version in Philosophical Books 49, January 2008) STACIE FRIEND Birkbeck College, London Fictionalism has become a standard,
More informationThe normativity of content and the Frege point
The normativity of content and the Frege point Jeff Speaks March 26, 2008 In Assertion, Peter Geach wrote: A thought may have just the same content whether you assent to its truth or not; a proposition
More informationCarnap s Non-Cognitivism as an Alternative to Both Value- Absolutism and Value-Relativism
Carnap s Non-Cognitivism as an Alternative to Both Value- Absolutism and Value-Relativism Christian Damböck Institute Vienna Circle christian.damboeck@univie.ac.at Carnap s Non-Cognitivism as a Better
More informationMcCLOSKEY ON RATIONAL ENDS: The Dilemma of Intuitionism
48 McCLOSKEY ON RATIONAL ENDS: The Dilemma of Intuitionism T om R egan In his book, Meta-Ethics and Normative Ethics,* Professor H. J. McCloskey sets forth an argument which he thinks shows that we know,
More informationBoghossian & Harman on the analytic theory of the a priori
Boghossian & Harman on the analytic theory of the a priori PHIL 83104 November 2, 2011 Both Boghossian and Harman address themselves to the question of whether our a priori knowledge can be explained in
More informationThe Inscrutability of Reference and the Scrutability of Truth
SECOND EXCURSUS The Inscrutability of Reference and the Scrutability of Truth I n his 1960 book Word and Object, W. V. Quine put forward the thesis of the Inscrutability of Reference. This thesis says
More informationMoral Cognitivism vs. Non-Cognitivism
Moral Cognitivism vs. Non-Cognitivism First published Fri Jan 23, 2004; substantive revision Sun Jun 7, 2009 Non-cognitivism is a variety of irrealism about ethics with a number of influential variants.
More informationTHE TWO-DIMENSIONAL ARGUMENT AGAINST MATERIALISM AND ITS SEMANTIC PREMISE
Diametros nr 29 (wrzesień 2011): 80-92 THE TWO-DIMENSIONAL ARGUMENT AGAINST MATERIALISM AND ITS SEMANTIC PREMISE Karol Polcyn 1. PRELIMINARIES Chalmers articulates his argument in terms of two-dimensional
More informationRemarks on a Foundationalist Theory of Truth. Anil Gupta University of Pittsburgh
For Philosophy and Phenomenological Research Remarks on a Foundationalist Theory of Truth Anil Gupta University of Pittsburgh I Tim Maudlin s Truth and Paradox offers a theory of truth that arises from
More informationConditionals II: no truth conditions?
Conditionals II: no truth conditions? UC Berkeley, Philosophy 142, Spring 2016 John MacFarlane 1 Arguments for the material conditional analysis As Edgington [1] notes, there are some powerful reasons
More informationJudith Jarvis Thomson s Normativity
Judith Jarvis Thomson s Normativity Gilbert Harman June 28, 2010 Normativity is a careful, rigorous account of the meanings of basic normative terms like good, virtue, correct, ought, should, and must.
More informationA Solution to the Gettier Problem Keota Fields. the three traditional conditions for knowledge, have been discussed extensively in the
A Solution to the Gettier Problem Keota Fields Problem cases by Edmund Gettier 1 and others 2, intended to undermine the sufficiency of the three traditional conditions for knowledge, have been discussed
More informationExpressing Credences. Daniel Rothschild All Souls College, Oxford OX1 4AL
Expressing Credences Daniel Rothschild All Souls College, Oxford OX1 4AL daniel.rothschild@philosophy.ox.ac.uk Abstract After presenting a simple expressivist account of reports of probabilistic judgments,
More informationA Rational Solution to the Problem of Moral Error Theory? Benjamin Scott Harrison
A Rational Solution to the Problem of Moral Error Theory? Benjamin Scott Harrison In his Ethics, John Mackie (1977) argues for moral error theory, the claim that all moral discourse is false. In this paper,
More informationWorld without Design: The Ontological Consequences of Natural- ism , by Michael C. Rea.
Book reviews World without Design: The Ontological Consequences of Naturalism, by Michael C. Rea. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2004, viii + 245 pp., $24.95. This is a splendid book. Its ideas are bold and
More informationDefinite Descriptions and the Argument from Inference
Philosophia (2014) 42:1099 1109 DOI 10.1007/s11406-014-9519-9 Definite Descriptions and the Argument from Inference Wojciech Rostworowski Received: 20 November 2013 / Revised: 29 January 2014 / Accepted:
More informationActualism, Possibilism, and Beyond 1
Jacob Ross Actualism, Possibilism, and Beyond 1 How is what an agent ought to do related to what an agent ought to prefer that she does? More precisely, suppose we know what an agent s preference ordering
More informationMETAETHICAL MORAL RELATIVISM AND THE ANALOGY WITH PHYSICS
Praxis, Vol. 1, No. 1, Spring 2008 ISSN 1756-1019 METAETHICAL MORAL RELATIVISM AND THE ANALOGY WITH PHYSICS ALEXANDRE ERLER LINCOLN COLLEGE, OXFORD Abstract This paper deals with a specific version of
More informationIn Search of the Ontological Argument. Richard Oxenberg
1 In Search of the Ontological Argument Richard Oxenberg Abstract We can attend to the logic of Anselm's ontological argument, and amuse ourselves for a few hours unraveling its convoluted word-play, or
More informationParadox of Deniability
1 Paradox of Deniability Massimiliano Carrara FISPPA Department, University of Padua, Italy Peking University, Beijing - 6 November 2018 Introduction. The starting elements Suppose two speakers disagree
More informationScientific Progress, Verisimilitude, and Evidence
L&PS Logic and Philosophy of Science Vol. IX, No. 1, 2011, pp. 561-567 Scientific Progress, Verisimilitude, and Evidence Luca Tambolo Department of Philosophy, University of Trieste e-mail: l_tambolo@hotmail.com
More informationON PROMOTING THE DEAD CERTAIN: A REPLY TO BEHRENDS, DIPAOLO AND SHARADIN
DISCUSSION NOTE ON PROMOTING THE DEAD CERTAIN: A REPLY TO BEHRENDS, DIPAOLO AND SHARADIN BY STEFAN FISCHER JOURNAL OF ETHICS & SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY DISCUSSION NOTE APRIL 2017 URL: WWW.JESP.ORG COPYRIGHT STEFAN
More informationINESCAPABILITY AND NORMATIVITY
BY MATTHEW SILVERSTEIN JOURNAL OF ETHICS & SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY VOL. 6, NO. 3 DECEMBER 2012 URL: WWW.JESP.ORG COPYRIGHT MATTHEW SILVERSTEIN 2012 Inescapability and Normativity It may seem a far cry from Kant
More informationThe University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Ethics.
Reply to Southwood, Kearns and Star, and Cullity Author(s): by John Broome Source: Ethics, Vol. 119, No. 1 (October 2008), pp. 96-108 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/592584.
More informationTHE CASE OF THE MINERS
DISCUSSION NOTE BY VUKO ANDRIĆ JOURNAL OF ETHICS & SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY DISCUSSION NOTE JANUARY 2013 URL: WWW.JESP.ORG COPYRIGHT VUKO ANDRIĆ 2013 The Case of the Miners T HE MINERS CASE HAS BEEN PUT FORWARD
More information